Rebels: "Ghosts of Geonosis: Part 1" (Ep. 3.12)

-- "There are times I hate being right, and I hope this isn't one of them."

I guess we're on a dead planet kick: Dathomir last episode, Geonosis this episode and next. Wow! The Clone Wars really left a lot of dead planets. Which makes me wonder about the "current" state of Mandalore. The original conception of Boba Fett was that he was the last of the Mandalorians, but so much of that got changed in the prequels and the subsequent Clone Wars episodes dealing with Mandalore that I'm sure what the current status actually is. I'm not even sure the Fetts were supposed to be Mandalorian at this point.

None of which has to do with this episode at all.

So getting back to Geonosis, a great place for a vacation home!
If, you know, you like absolute solitude. That is until the zombie bugs come for you.
None of which are in this episode.

But Saw Gerrera is in this episode! And he's looking more like how he looked in Rogue One than he did last time we saw him. Saw's an interesting character, one who could probably support his own series. [Hear that Disney? Give us a Saw Gerrera series!] He's gone missing on Geonosis investigating the disappearance of the entire population of the planet. And what do you do when your team investigating a disappearance also disappears? You send more people, of course!
And Jedi, if you have them.

Not that the rebels have actual Jedi, but they have the closest thing to it that's left in the galaxy.

I'm sure all of this is leading us toward the Death Star and Rogue One, but that's just a guess.

"They kind of look like battle droids to tell you the truth. Ugly battle droids that smell."

"Honestly, I was hoping I'd never have to come back to this dust bowl."

Clone Wars -- "The General" (Ep. 4.8)

-- The path of ignorance is guided by fear.

[Remember, you can sign up to join the Clone Wars Project at any time by clicking this link.]

They've done a good job with making Umbara a creepy place. I may have said some of this last time, but it's full of strange, glowing lights; strange, glowing creatures; and strange, glowing death machines that look like strange, glowing creatures. It's fortuitous that these episodes have fallen during the month of October. The only other episodes I can think of that would work so well this month would have been the zombie Geonosian episodes.

General Krell continues to be completely casual about the deaths of his troopers. He doesn't care to explore options because he doesn't have a problem with throwing clones against a wall until the manage to break it down. The lives don't matter because, to Krell, they're not lives. This is brought to light early on when one of the clones, Fives, points out that the general's outstanding record of victories comes along with the highest, by far, casualty count of any other Jedi. This is contrasted to Anakin leading from the front, because Krell leads from the rear. From camp, actually, without, so far, getting involved in any of the combat, something I find odd from a Jedi who is supposed to be such a fearsome combatant.

[Actually, I don't find it odd, because I know what happens from my previous watching of the series; however, I would find it odd if I didn't know. I'm sure my first response to Krell was "what an asshole." Well, now, I already know why.]

The episode is full of some great fight sequences, and you might want to say that they're gratuitous, but they're really not. They serve two purposes:
1. To show Krell's complete disregard for the lives of his clones as he continues to tell them "frontal assault!" no matter how bad things get.
2. To show the divide within the clone ranks themselves as they dissent about whether Krell's orders should be followed.

This is a good story arc and much needed for the redemption of season four.

Also, the opening quote (seen up under the picture) is very appropriate for our own current election season.

Exploring Personality: Part Eight -- "Give me something to believe in." (an IWM post)

"...if you shake my hand, that's for life." -- Jerry Lewis

The Loyalist

Of all the types, the Six can be the hardest to categorize. That's because the Six is, in many ways, a walking contradiction. For instance, the Six is known as the Loyalist, but the Six is just as likely to be the anti-Loyalist. The problem with Sixes is that they have a fear of committing to anything, a fear which stems from a lack of confidence in themselves with being able to make a correct decision. What if they make the wrong choice?

* * *

But for you, right now, the correct choice is to click over to Indie Writers Monthly and find out how it is that it could be the Sixes who save the world. No, seriously. They plan ahead like that. No problem too small, no apocalypse too big.

Dead and Moaning in Las Vegas (a book review post)

I'm not much a fan of the modern zombie story. Or, actually, of any zombie stories. I just don't get the attraction. Well, from a sociological standpoint, I do get the attraction, as I've talked about before, but I am not attracted (maybe, it's the lack of a cell phone). That doesn't mean there hasn't been the odd zombie story here or there that I haven't disliked:
Resident Evil (the movie, not the game (which I've never played), and only the first one)
Shaun of the Dead
Dead Beat
Really, I think it all comes down to this whole eating brains thing, which I just don't get. Where did that idea even come from and what kind of sense does it make?

Well, it doesn't make any sense, and that's part of the charm of Dead and Moaning in Las Vegas. That it pokes its rotting finger at the whole zombie thing while adding in social commentary is what makes the book work. That and the completely unlikely heroes. And that the real villain is not one of the zombies. And that the zombies are almost lovable with their constant nose-picking and chewing on, well, everything they can get their hands on while looking for "fud."

The only drawback is that it's never really explained what's going on, but I think that's just a drawback for me, because it's part of the structure of the story and an explanation would actually weaken it. Still, for me, I want to know what's going on. How everything happened. Okay, honestly, I think that information is already in the story in that it takes place in Las Vegas, but that's all the hint from me that you're going to get.

At any rate, if you like zombie stories and you don't mind them being mixed with hilarious absurd comedy, you should love this book. If you don't like zombie stories but love absurd comedy, you may still love this book. If you take zombies just a little too seriously, you might want to hop on your Segway and look for the newest "how to survive the zombie apocalypse" book.

A note:
I'm not dealing with any editing, etc issues in this review, because my copy of the book is from the release, and it had some formatting issues. My understanding is that all of that stuff has been fixed.

Fright Fest!

Part of taking advantage of the season passes we have to Six Flags meant going to the big Halloween thing they have: Fright Fest. In theory, I had no problem with this. I mean, it sounded kind of fun. On the other side of that, it meant taking two trips, because, the first weekend we planned to go (Fright Fest takes place during the whole month of October), my daughter got invited to a sleepover, so, although we went, we had to leave early-ish to get her back in time, and none of the scary stuff had started yet. That was kind of annoying.

But we made plans to go back just for the scary stuff the following weekend. I use the term "scary stuff" kind of loosely. Let me explain:

Six Flags had a posted warning that children under 12 should not stay after dark because the park would become too scary for them. I saw the warning the first weekend we went and had some trepidation about taking my daughter who scares relatively easily and is less than 12.

The Fright Fest attractions were divided into free attractions and additional fee attractions. So, yeah, first, you have to pay to get in the gates (unless you have a season pass), which isn't cheap, and, then, you have to pay by "ride" for more than a half-dozen different attractions. I'm assuming the paid attractions weren't cheap, because they didn't have the prices listed on any of the literature, and we chose to only do the free attractions. The paid attractions were almost exclusively listed as "very scary," but there were a couple of the free ones that were also listed as "very scary."

I have to say that if the free haunted places were a good representation of what scary is, then nothing was more scary than having some people dressed up as zombies. I don't know; maybe, I'm just jaded, but nothing struck me as scary and, other than the zombie clowns (whom my daughter thought were freaky (because clowns already start out creepy, according to her)), my daughter was barely fazed.

They did have some good shows in there, though. We saw Jim Mackenzie, a juggler and comedian. He had some sinus issues (note the nail in his nose),

probably caused by running with scissors.

He also juggled fire.

We also saw the zombie pirate and sea lion show.

So the kids had fun, and the costumes the employees wore were pretty incredible. Here are some other pictures:

Oh, and my daughter tried to feed  my son to a giant alligator.

And, for the moment, we managed to avoid

How To Be... a Genetic Engineer

One of the earliest loves of my younger son was Pokemon (his first love was Star Wars at all of one year of age, but that's a story for another time). I suppose this was back around when he was four or five, although the exact age when all of the Pokemon stuff started is a little hazy. However, I do remember that he was, at first, disappointed to find out that Pikachus

do not really exist, but that passed quickly into a determination to grow up and make one. With the way things are going, that may actually be a possibility by the time he is of an age to do so.

Genetic engineering, as we most commonly think of it, the direct manipulation of DNA by humans (not including selective breeding or mutagenesis), has only existed since the 70s, but we have come oh so far since then (check last year's post for some of the things we've already accomplished). The real issue is that, right now, we don't really know where we're going with it, and some people are scared of the field in its entirety. And, hey, who can blame anyone for being scared with all of the zombie fear? Genetically engineered diseases are at the root of many of these ideas.

However, with the sort of wide openness in the field of genetic engineering, it leaves a lot of room to do with it what you want. Right now, there is no "genetic engineering" degree. It's not like electrical engineering where you can go to school and learn the basics. There are no real basics for genetic engineering. Well, there are, but they are very basic. Like, you need to know a lot about biology (in general), cell biology (in specific), chemistry, biochemistry, and... well, and whatever it is you want to be working with. Plants? Animals? Microbes? You need to know about it.

Once you have the background knowledge you need, it's really just about finding someone willing to hire you on to work in a lab working on genetic engineering projects. Well, that, or taking that Dr. Frankenstein route and doing it yourself, which seems completely plausible assuming you had the resources to do it. Like I said, no one really knows, yet, where we can go with genetic engineering or what is and is not possible, so, maybe, my son will grow up and engineer his own Pikachu.

U2 and the Quest for a #1

I love the band U2, of which I've made no secret. I've loved them since the first time I ever heard them. They're my favorite band, and have been for, well, a long, long time. Unfortunately, I missed out on their formative years, because I just didn't listen to that type of music at that time.

I grew up, as most people do, on my parents' music (more specifically, my mother's music). Not that everyone grew up on my parents' music, because I don't remember you all at my house when I was a kid, so I expect that you grew up on your parents' music. My mother was into folk stuff: Simon and Garfunkel; Peter, Paul, and Mary; Bob Dylan. There was a little Beatles thrown in, but I was never into them (my mom still (at least I hope it's still) has the white album and Sgt. Pepper on vinyl). Oh, and the Beach Boys. At any rate, when I finally got into music on my own (at the very old age of 15), I tended toward that kind of music and listened to a "light rock" station that played "hits from the 60s, 70s, and 80s." I was really into Air Supply if that tells you anything. What the station I listened to didn't play was actual rock music which meant that the station did not play U2.

The first time I ever remember hearing of U2 was my junior year of high school. I was dating this girl that was constantly asking me about songs of theirs, especially "Sunday Bloody Sunday." She couldn't seem to hold it in her head that I had never heard of U2 before she mentioned them, and I continued to not try to figure out who they were 1. because she wouldn't leave me alone about them. 2. because her other favorite group was Pink Floyd, and I was certainly not interested in them (thank you very much).

So it wasn't until the release of "With or Without You," a song that the station I listened to would play, that I finally heard a U2 song. I was instantly hooked. I loved that song. I had to know who that group was, and I was kind of not happy to find out that it was U2 1. because my (by then) ex-girlfriend had bugged me about them all the time. 2. because I wished I'd taken the time to see who they were when she was bugging me about them all the time. I dived into all of their older stuff along with The Joshua Tree and 1987 became my own personal year of U2 quite aside from what was going on with them and the rest of the world.

But what did it take for them to finally get my attention? A #1 single. And a #1 single was something that U2 actively sought. They were striving for it. This highlights the question for me of "Is it art if it's commercial?" And that's a whole different discussion, the difference between what is and what is not art, so I'm not really going to go into that; however, it has some bearing on where I'm going with this, so it had to be mentioned.

When U2 first got together, they didn't know what they were doing. Larry Mullen was the only one that really knew anything about music. They were just a bunch of kids that wanted to be in a band. But they practiced hard and learned. Not just learning to make music but learning who they were. That bit, the bit of learning themselves, learning their voice, was just as important as learning how to make music. One was learning the technical skills and the other was learning their specific art, their voice.

Skipping the history lesson, all of this lead to their first album, Boy. Boy and, later, October were received well critically, but they failed to achieve the kind of commercial success that they and Island Records wanted. They were making art, good art, but no one was seeing it. Well, hearing it. They wanted a #1 single, and they set about to get it. They wanted, in short, commercial success.

This is where a lot of people would say they "sold out." They let their desire to be commercially successful destroy their art. (Not that I know if anyone would actually say this about U2, but it would be said about a lot of other people in this position.) It's at this point that a lot of bands, writers, painters, artists of whatever stripe would have sold out. They would have looked around at what was popular and tried to mimic that, subverting their art into something that it wasn't in hopes of becoming popular so that "one day" they could return to what they really wanted to do.

U2 didn't do that. The used their desire for commercial success to drive them to become, well, to become more them. They didn't look around at what was popular in music and try to do that; they just kept pushing to get better. I look at it like what Michelangelo said about his sculpture David, (and this is a paraphrase) "I chipped away everything that wasn't David." I think U2 chipped away everything that wasn't U2 in becoming the band that released three #1 singles from The Joshua Tree. Certainly, they did not pattern themselves after  the things that were popular at the time as often what they were doing was at right angles to what everyone else was doing.

Often people look down on artists that want commercial success. It's as if the desire to be successful somehow makes them less. Makes them, in short, a sellout. Like it's a choice. You can either do art or you can be commercial. The truth is, though, that it's not a choice. Sure, so many of us think that it is that we frequently make it into a choice. For instance, the choice between writing a vampire/zombie novel (commercial) or writing about the long road trip through the desert (art).

The real problem is that too many people never figure out their specific art before trying to get the #1. They don't spend the time discovering their own voice so that they can become more of themselves when they're ready to reach for the goal of making their art a commercial success. Instead, they just strive for commercial success and leave their art behind hoping to go back to it one day.

The truth is that there doesn't have to be a choice. If you know your art, if you've spent time with it, learning it, discovering it, becoming it, when it comes time to achieve, you do that by becoming more "it." You chip away everything that's not "you," and you take your art along with you.

Yeah, yeah, I know, that doesn't guarantee that you get the #1. But, then, nothing guarantees that you get the #1. But, if you do, no one can call you a sellout, right? And you're still you. I think that's the key to all real success and to being happy in your success. The ability to become more of who you are, not becoming something you're not.

Learn your art. Become your art. Become more you.


I really wish I could give you my top 10 U2 songs or something, but I can't get it down to 10. I even like Pop and Zooropa, if that tells you anything. I'll think more about this one and, maybe, give you a top 10 countdown at some point.

The A to Z of Fiction to Reality: Zero Gravity and Zombies!

Well, I'm going with an easy one for "Z." Really, "Z" just proved to be the hardest letter to find something for. I even had "Q" and "X" from the very beginning, but "Y" and "Z"? Hours of digging... hours! And I never found any one satisfactory item for this last letter... but I'm going to give you zombies, so lay off.

No, not zombies in space; although, that could be interesting. They wouldn't need to worry about decompression, you know, being already dead and sort of decompressed already, so that could make things interesting. Okay, someone go write that book, because I'm not going to do it.

Anyway...

We're heading back to Jules Verne land. As a complete aside, I'm astounded at how often the same few names come up over and over again in this series: Verne, Wells, Asimov, even Gibson. I didn't plan it that way, but you end up back at the same visionary minds time and again. Heck, da Vinci even pops up several times, and he didn't write! Not that he didn't write... oh, never mind!

So! Jules Verne... He really kick started this whole zero gravity  thing by making space weightless. I bet you didn't know that, did you? Before Verne, space was not weightless. All planets and moons had the same gravity as Earth and everything. But Verne made space weightless and all of that changed. You do know I'm kidding, right? Some of you people are just SO literal!

There was Verne and, then, there was Wells, and they both had these trips to the moon and space having no gravity, and we found out that it was true! And, then, all space sci-fi had weightlessness, of course, and that presented issues... like, how do you drink from a cup when there's no gravity to hold the liquid in? And, over time, sci-fi authors identified many of these things that would be issues and addressed them in various novels and short stories, and some of these things have worked their way into reality. And, no, I'm not going to do any kind of exhaustive list or anything. Sorry. It's the last day, and I'm just not doing it.

However, I am going to point out one of the things I find interesting. Moving from place to place in a space ship or space station presents some problems. At the moment, they're not huge problems, because our vehicles and things are still fairly small, but, still, NASA wanted a way for astronauts to be able to walk around, and one of the first things they experimented with was magnetism. Why magnetism? I'm gonna just say that it's a safe bet that that came to mind as early as it did because that's the method so many sci-fi authors used to enable people to walk around in space ships: magnetic boots. But NASA found they didn't really work. Sure, they kept you from floating around, but, if they made the magnets strong enough to hold you in place, that's exactly what they did; they held you in place. Forget about walking.

Looking through references to older science fiction literature, I found a lot about magnets. Magnetic tables, magnetic cups, magnetic everything... Of course, all of this was written before electronics, especially computers, were really a thing. At this point, magnetic anything is entirely out of the question. Oops! Set that magnetic cup down too close to the computer and erased the landing instructions! Darn! Hate when that happens! Still... it's all a very interesting progression, especially when you look to see how sci-fi changed to accommodate reality afterwards and how those changes affected future developments in the space program. And, hey, they're still working on that artificial gravity stuff, so, if that ever actually works, that's entirely from sci-fi. No matter how it happens, I think. And all of that may also lead to anti-gravity...

At any rate, if we ever do decide to get off of our butts and really explore the solar system, it will be interesting to see what other ways sci-fi informs reality. It's about time we had miners out there in the asteroid belt! Speaking of miners... I just saw an article about how James Cameron and a bunch of other billionaires have founded a company to explore the possibilities of mining the asteroid belt. Yeah, they are doing that now. Not the mining part, but they expect to be within the next 20 years. So... yeah...

And now... zombies...

And, man, I just really don't want to do this. I have a philosophical difference with zombies, but I've talked about that before, and I've talked about talking about that before, so I'm really not going to get into it. Let's just say that "I don't believe in zombies" and leave it at that. But I did the whole cyborg menace, so, I guess, I'm being fair. Even though cyborgs are actually real and zombies are not, more people believe in zombies, which gives them the same kind of realism as learning to speak Klingon, and we all know about that, now, don't we?

The very first (recorded) zombie walk was all the way back in 2001. In California. It was successful enough that they had one again the next year, and it is now an annual event in Sacramento. So, yeah, not just in CA, but in the capitol of CA. The idea caught on fairly rapidly, kind of like a zombie disease, and these things happen all over the world now. Guinness has a place in its records, now, for Zombie Walks. The largest one record was in Mexico in November of 2011 with nearly 10,000 zombies in attendance. Amazing!

Movies and TV and books... zombies are everywhere. I do appreciate Shaun of the Dead, though, and think Simon Pegg is brilliant. Like I said, I don't believe in zombies despite the fact that they do seem to be all over the place and people have actual survival plans in the event of the coming zombie apocalypse, but, maybe, it will be a shame if that apocalypse never happens. Well... at least, they'll be ready for the cyborgs!

The A to Z of Fiction to Reality: Cyborgs

Ah, cyborgs. If there's anything more terrifying than an apocalypse caused by an out-of-control AI, it's an apocalypse where we're all turned into some kind of cyborgs controlled by that out-of-control AI. Okay, I hear you zombie people out there, but don't get me started on zombies (I already did a post about that). Besides, I think we see a lot of similarities between the cyborg masses (like the Cybermen and the Borg) and zombies, and the cyborgs were here first. En masse, that is. In fiction. [The Cybermen pre-date Night of the Living Dead by two years.]

Anyway... this isn't meant to be a debate between cyborgs and zombies, so you zombie people shut it.

As with artificial intelligence, the concept pre-dates the word, which didn't come about until 1960 (in an article about human-machine systems in space). In the 1840s, Edgar Allan Poe wrote "The Man That Was Used Up" about a man that has been so damaged, has to use so many prostheses, that he has to be put together every morning before anyone can see him. "He's more machine, now, than man." (No, that's not from Poe's story for anyone that's wondering. It is, however, what immediately came to mind.) However, it was Jean de la Hire who is attributed to creating the first literary cyborg in 1908 with the character Nyctalope from The Man Who Can Live in the Water.

Edmond Hamilton may be more responsible for bringing cyborgs into fiction than anyone else, though. In his novel The Comet Doom (1928), he has characters that are a mesh of organic and machine parts which enable them to operate in outer space, the very thing that was cited in the scientific article in 1960 in which the term cyborg originates. He is also the first person to use the term in a piece of fiction in his 1962 short story "After a Judgment Day."

Possibly, the most famous (earthly (because, let's face it, it's hard to actually get more (in)famous than Darth Vader (yes, he's a cyborg))) individual cyborg (as opposed to a cyborg race like the Cybermen or the Borg) is Steve Austin from the novel, you guessed it, Cyborg from 1972 by sci-fi author Martin Caidin. The book was adapted into the television show The Six Million Dollar Man and its spin off The Bionic Woman. Several sequels to the book followed.

Cyborg systems are a thing of the now even if not in ways that would cause us to think of people as cyborgs. Our current emphasis is to use these systems to restore function to ailing body systems (as with artificial hearts) or replace lost limbs. Prosthetics are not so simples these days as they were when they amounted to just a hook or a peg. Many of these artificial limbs could be capable of enhanced performance; we just don't do that. Yet. I'm sure that day is coming.

As soon as it's shown to be profitable, that is.

But cyborgs aren't limited to people, even if that's what we think of when we think of cyborgs. We think of this:

But, really, this also counts:

Yes, that is a snail. A cyborg snail. Yes, it is real. And it's kind of scary. You can go read all about it here. It's scary because cyborg insects seem to be a big deal to the military. Yeah, you can step on them, but it will mean that anything could be a surveillance device. Anything. [And, since that article is about sustainable power, I also saw an article about robotic jelly fish (robojellies or something like that) that have sustainable power (but I didn't keep the link).]

All of that to say that cyborgs are here. Now. Maybe not all around you, but they could be. And sooner than you might think.

Zombies: A Cultural Metaphor

Society has changed in the last four decades. This is not to say that society isn't always changing, but the change that has occurred recently (recent being a relative term) is one that we've never seen before. Technological progress, throughout the ages, has always been seen as a good thing. I don't mean scientific discovery, which has not always been viewed positively, but the actual trinkets of technology that scientific progress has made possible. Mankind has always had an innate sense that he could do no wrong. That belief has dissipated like morning mist.

Four decades ago, a zombie was still just a zombie. A re-animated corpse. Slow. Stupid. No will of its own. It was something created by man that man controlled. The only exception to this rule was Frankenstein's monster, but the Frankenstein monster became a special case and has never really been viewed as a zombie. Even though zombies could be controlled, they were still dead things. Just animated. They had no more need of sustenance than does a marionette. They did not hunger. They did not want. They only obeyed.

That all began to change in 1968 with the release of Night of the Living Dead. For the first time, the dead, en masse, rose up against the living to devour them. It was the first use of zombies to symbolize that man might, just possibly, be playing around with forces he didn't understand.

The 80s arrived and, with it, a culture of teenagers that didn't believe they would live to be adults. Post-apocalyptic literature/entertainment hit its stride. Not that it hadn't existed, but, prior to the 80s, (and I am now going to lump all of this together into the dystopian category) dystopians had really been isolated events.
And I mean it when I say we didn't believe that we would make it through high school without nuclear holocaust being thrust upon us. In middle school, for a Christmas door decorating contest, my homeroom did a whole Nuclear Winter theme. We even re-wrote several popular Christmas songs with lyrics like, "I'm dreaming of a nuclear winter."

However, the cold war ended, and we don't really believe an actual nuclear holocaust will happen anymore. No, now, we believe man will destroy the Earth in much more subtle ways. Like a zombie apocalypse. Zombies have become the representation of our fear that mankind will, ultimately, be unable to control the technology that he plays with. Zombies have evolved. They are no longer re-animated corpses. They're fast. They're smart. They're hungry. They want to destroy us. Destroy life. They're smart, but they are unthinking. Their intelligence is applied only to achieving their goal. Devouring us Destroying life. Hmm... somewhat like the single-minded way in which corporations pursue financial success.

In short, zombies have become a cultural metaphor for all the ways in which technology will destroy us.

However, that's only  the metaphor in its simplest form. The obvious one. The one that has to do with our nightmares over what secret things governments and corporations are doing in the dark. It lives off of our fears that we'll wake up, shivering and drenched in sweat, and find out that society has collapsed. No rules. Only chaos.

The deeper part of that fear extends down to where we believe that technology is actually turning each of us into zombies. Especially the generation that's growing up around us. The generation of technological zombies. You know it's true. People refuse to be detached from their technology. People that grew up without it and know it's possible to leave home without a phone and still survive refuse to go without, so how do we show the (little) people who have never known life without cells that it's possible to go without? It's with us everywhere. And it's scary. But, still, we embrace it. We can't help it.

Despite the data that the use of cellular devices, in whatever capacity, while driving is more dangerous than driving while intoxicated, we choose to believe that we can handle it, and we don't have the excuse of impaired judgement that intoxication brings. Despite the new warnings by WHO (the World Health Organization, not the Doctor. Or the band.) that cellular devices bring a greater risk of brain cancer, especially in children and adolescents, we will go on using our bits and pieces of technology and deal with any consequences later. Despite the continued statements of desire to connect with people in actual face-to-face contact, we will, more and more often, forsake physicalness in favor of a virtual reality that we can "control."

We are becoming the zombies that we fear. Soulless creatures walking through life but only seeing things through the tiny input devices we hold in our hands. And just wait till they can actually put that stuff right inside our skulls. Is it any wonder that we have become so incredibly fascinated with zombies? After all, vampires could be defeated. How do we defeat ourselves?

Another Day, Another...

Blogfest!

Bess Weatherby is hosting a blogfest that starts today.

 I  think I may have acted rashly in signing up for it. See, this 'fest is all about setting goals, and I'm just not much of one for any kind of long-range goal setting. Ask my wife. She hates it. She likes making plans and lists, and I'm not that kinda guy. Okay, well, I do, sometimes, make lists. Because, I'm finding, that I'm forgetting more and more things that, once upon a time, I would never have forgotten. I blame it on my kids, and I know that I'm right to do so.

I do have a list of writing goals sitting next to my computer. It's a list. Things I need to work on. In fact, I had to get up in the MIDDLE of the NIGHT, last night, and add something to it. I HATE that. But, as I was falling asleep, I had this thought. A really good thought. And my brain kept telling me that I was going to forget about it if I didn't get up and write it down. I kept telling my brain that I wouldn't forget, because it would remember, but it kept saying, "No, I won't remember. Get up and write it down." I argued with my brain for a long time. Maybe an hour. I lost. I got up and wrote it down. My first thought this morning when I got up was that idea. Without looking at the list. So I was right, but I still lost the argument. Here's a one word teaser about the idea: zombies!

Okay, so... the blogfest has two parts:

1. What your current WIP looks like:

Darn, I don't what that means. I don't even know what my current WIP is. I mean, does The House on the Corner count because I'm not quite finished with my revision? I'm almost finished. I'm actually slightly behind schedule on that. I wanted to be finished with it by the end of May. All of the major re-writing is finished. I just have to finish going through it making word corrections and such.

Or is my current WIP Brother's Keeper? I mean, that is my next major project. I'm also behind on that. Because, originally, I had intended to start it in February, but that was a goal I set back before I started blogging and revising, and, see, that's why I hate long-range plans. They never work out the way I want them to. At any rate, the first chapter of Brother's Keeper is posted up in the tabbies at the top, but I'm not much further than that.

2. What your writing goals are for the summer:

Okay, writing goals for the summer... that's... difficult. See, I have these parasites that hang around all summer interrupting me constantly. I'm not one of those people that can write in bits and pieces. I have to have solid chunks of quiet without interruptions. It's annoying. However, I'll give it a shot.

a. Have the manuscript for The House on the Corner: The First Person Edition ready by the end of the day June 17 (I actually wanted that to be June 10, but, I think, since I have all these end of the school year parent/teacher conferences, that I'm not quite going to finish that, this week).

b. Have some sort of cover worked out for The House on the Corner: The First Person Edition by June 24. That's going to be a hard one. I have no artist, and I don't really know how to turn any art I may decide to do into a cover.

c. Starting next week, do (at least) 2000 words a week on Brother's Keeper. I'm not sure how that will work since I'll have afore mentioned parasites running loose.

d. Post 2-3 times a week on the blog.

Those are the have to's. There are some other things I'd like to do, but, looking at that list, it might actually be too much considering there will be swimming lessons in there, music lessons, and, um, I'm not even sure what else.

So there you have it. I wish everyone else doing this the best of luck with both the setting of the goals and the achieving of them!